Tag Archives: politics

Smart Diplomacy

Posted on by
Reply

Iran has resumed test launching ballistic missiles, in contravention of UN resolutions and of Iran’s nuclear weapons development agreement with the Obama administration and the rest of the P5+1. But here’s the kicker:

Iranian leaders now say that they are poised to walk away from the deal if the United States and other global powers fail to advance the Islamic Republic’s “national interests.”

“If our interests are not met under the nuclear deal, there will be no reason for us to continue,” Abbas Araqchi, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister, warned during remarks delivered to a group of Iranian officials in Tehran.

Senator Mark Kirk (R, IL) has the right of it:

The administration’s response to Iran’s new salvo of threatening missile tests in violation of international law cannot once again be, it’s “not supposed to be doing that.”

And, yet, that’s all John Kerry (D, SecState) has had to say about it.

There’s some smart diplomacy here. Just not by the Obama coterie.

The PRC’s Economic Malaise

Posted on by
Reply

Andrew Browne had some thoughts in a recent Wall Street Journal article. PRC’s Premier, Li Keqiang, wanted to do some serious revamping of the nation’s economic structure and deemphasize a massively overbuilt industrial capacity, shifting the economy more toward consumer production and consumer spending. His words—”This is not nail-clipping; it’s like taking a knife to one’s own flesh”—were reminiscent of his predecessor’s actions. Zhu Rongji eliminated 30 million jobs in an actual overhaul attempt in the ’90s.

Thirty million jobs. That sounds like a lot, but with a workforce of roughly 800 million and roughly 95% employment (because, of course), those 30 million represent just 4% of the workers overall. That’s a sharp cut, but as job cuts go during downturns, it’s not that sharp.

But even that much was too much for Li. Or rather for PRC President Xi Jinping.

[H]igh-level economic policy-making and its practical implementation, once the preserve of the State Council headed by the premier, have increasingly fallen into the hands of Communist Party committees led by President Xi Jinping.

And

…Xi’s political preoccupations: to strengthen the party…to root out challenges to the régime, and to avoid social instability that could in any way threaten the party’s hold on power. If that means delaying unpopular economic adjustments, so be it.

“The party’s hold on power:” read that as Xi’s hold on power, say I. And the people of the People’s Republic can go hang.

It’s Their Fault

Posted on by
Reply

Couldn’t possibly be our fault. Couldn’t possibly be a simple failure to succeed in coordinating schedules.

President Barack Obama’s (D) National Security Council Spokesman Ned Price insists

We were surprised to first learn via media reports that the Prime Minister, rather than accept our invitation, opted to cancel his visit[.]

The meeting was going to coincide with a meeting of the American-Israel Political Action Committee. Never mind that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office was reluctant for the meeting to occur then because the appearance of our Presidential candidates at the AIPAC meeting could create the impression of Israeli interference in our elections.

It stretches credulity for Obama or his NSC to act as though they don’t understand that. That claim is especially not credible given that the Israeli ambassador already had told the White House—Obama—that it was unlikely that Netanyahu would make the trip.

Stem the Flow of Migrants

Posted on by
Reply

That’s what the EU is trying to persuade Turkey to do according to a Wall Street Journal article.

Before I get into that, there are a couple of points of clarification that are necessary. First, there is confusion on the part of the WSJ and/or the European Union leadership regarding who it is that’s traveling. Most of the present flow consists of refugees, not migrants; although there are certainly migrants in the mix, along with terrorists.

From that, it’s easy to see the moral distinction among the three concerning their “right” of entry into any nation of the EU or into the EU generally. Terrorists have no right to do anything but die. Migrants have no moral right to enter a nation that doesn’t want them—the nation is sovereign over its own territory; sovereignty is the purpose of borders. It’s a highly useful thing, from a mutual prosperity perspective, to permit an influx (and outflow) of migrants, but that utility is purely…utilitarian. There is a moral obligation to permit entry of refugees, but that entry cannot be without limits and controls: the receiving nation must be able to set the conditions under which the refugees can enter, under which they can stay, and for how long they can stay, or else the nation will be unable to handle those refugees in anything approaching a humane manner.

Within that, then, there’s this about the EU’s pushing Turkey to impose a metaphorical, if not physical, barrier on the flow of refugees (not “migrants”) at the Turkish borders.

In a draft statement to be adopted later on Monday, the [EU] leaders are set to tell migrants that the route north of Greece is completely closed, a move that without Turkey’s help will leave huge numbers of people trapped within the already overwhelmed country.

Here’s Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel:

There is only one possible solution: make sure the Schengen borders are perfectly hermetic against uncontrolled and illegal migrant flows[.]

Sure. And do what with them? The originating situation does not permit them to go back. Where they are cannot sustain them.

What the EU is proposing (instead?) makes little sense. They want Turkey to agree to take back refugees that have already made it into continental Europe (even Metropolitan Europe, to stretch an analogy), including Greece, and the EU will accept via direct transport (no harrowing and dangerous overland treks) “registered” refugees taken straight from UN-run camps in Turkey.

This raises a couple of questions. One is the nature of that registration: on what basis is the UN registering anybody, on what basis is the UN vetting anybody who’s being registered, on what basis do we even trust the UN to make a serious attempt at vetting? The other question concerns Turkey: the take backs and the direct-from-camp transports amount to little more than swaps of one population for another. How does this help Turkey deal humanely with the existing supply of millions of refugees already within its borders? There’s no easing of stress here.

Here’s an example of that stress, in one Turkish border town. Kilis sits within kilometers of the Syrian border and so is an early stop on refugees’ travels.

Home to about 100,000 Turks before the Syrian war, Kilis is straining from the arrival of more than 125,000 Syrians. The town’s water and sewage systems are struggling to cope. Schools are filled to capacity. Although Turkey is developing plans to build more classrooms, for now many Syrian children roam the streets, stay at home, or spend their days working in shops, cafes, and factories.

It’s been downhill from there, for the local Turks, for the refugees, for the nation of Turkey.

The Need for a Republican President

Posted on by
Reply

The need is starkly illustrated by a couple of developments involving cases, the Supreme Court, and Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.

One development is this:

Dow Chemical Co had agreed to pay $835 million to settle a class-action case rather than risk an appeal without the conservative justice.

The other is this:

The state Rifle and Pistol Association decided against filing a petition asking the Supreme Court to hear the case fearing the conservative Scalia’s death will make winning the case virtually impossible.

[Rifle and Pistol Association President and National Rifle Association board member, Tom] King said his lawyers advised that going forward could damage the case because the High Court at the very least would likely deliver a split 4-4 decision that would leave the law in place.

This puts a very high premium on electing a Republican president, so we have a good chance of nominating and confirming a conservative judge to the Supreme Court.